Grassroots

Often the grand scheme of public policy is what is discussed in the contexts of effective food allergy advocacy, and with focus being diverted towards the national scale, the importance of local efforts has seemingly eroded. However, its efficacy and centrality to change ought not to be ignored. Initiatives as simple as door to door, school to school, or email to email, have the ability to leave lasting impact. The trick is how?

At the grassroots level, there are generally 2 ways of reaching out. The first is breaching the topic with someone whom you have known for quite some time, and the other is having to educate strangers as the situation (or emergency) may demand. In either case, timing and context play a huge role in advocating effectively. As established in previous posts, reception is crucial to successful advocacy. The effort that must be taken to prime a hearer's mind towards receiving and critically evaluating the issue at hand can only be delivered through a combination of persuasive speaking and an urgency that transcends any situation that may be occurring.

However, in more relaxed settings, the approach must be slightly modified. The scene is not one of emergency, but one of learning, so in environments such as those, rather than emotion and sobriety comprising the essence of that encounter, an appeal to logic and emotion with a PARTICULAR AIM in mind is the winning combination.

There are many tools at our disposal to achieve a particular aim during an advocacy session. If the constraint of time is not of concern, and the audience is relatively small, one such tool is the collection of statistics released by accredited research institutions and labs globally. Say, for example, you are trying to raise awareness of allergens in schools. In that case, it might be of interest and particular utility for you to know that FARE recently published an empiric stating that over 25 million Americans suffer from food allergies in the United States; two children in every classroom. Using these numbers in the context of say, and educational seminar at a small local school, could have profound impact on the parents, teachers, and administration present. An element of veracity is brought to your presentation.

The context coupled with the appropriate data can influence the environment to become a safer one for all parties involved. However, a number stays a number until it is attached to a story. So, after establishing the logical basis the audience's concern, follow it up with a story at length describing IN THAT SETTING (in this case a school) a situation where someone (it could be yourself or someone else you know that has allergies) could have benefited from the awareness of allergies at that facility.

This serves as the bridge to your ultimate goal of that meeting. A great aim for meetings of this sort is to offer a novel precaution or accommodation of some sort. In this example of presenting to a school board and parents, a great facility adjustment is having clear labeling protocol in eating areas. This imbibes the session with purpose and equips your audience with agency to act and change the status quo given the investment of time they have put in to hear you speak.

Having finished the presentation or proposal, follow-up is the best way to finish sessions of these sorts. In the spur of the moment, people may express agreement with your ideas, but to make those affirmations practical in the long-term, communication until the end goal is actually achieved/implemented is essential. Using these sets of principles as a general blueprint for your advocacy initiatives, I hope you start to see your grass root efforts, in whatever form they may be, start to take root.